Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!iuvax!purdue!ames!sgi!shinobu!odin!hargrove From: hargrove@harlie.sgi.com (Mark Hargrove) Newsgroups: comp.databases Subject: Re: Parsing Query Languages in the Client or Server Message-ID: Date: 21 Sep 89 19:09:47 GMT References: <6155@sybase.sybase.com> Organization: Silicon Graphics Inc, Mountain View, CA Lines: 22 In article <6155@sybase.sybase.com> forrest@sybase.com writes: >Parse trees might result in less network traffic than actual query text. But the standards committee necessary to decide upon the X.nnn Standard Relational Parse Tree Format will generate sufficient extra network traffic arguing over the issue to make up for any possible savings over, say, a 10 year period :-) It doesnt' really seem like anyone's arguing this issue: consensus is for pushing SQL (or CL/1, or whatever) down the pipe in native format; let the server figure it out. The Hard Problem here is getting vendors to agree on what "standard" SQL means. -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Mark Hargrove Silicon Graphics, Inc. email: hargrove@harlie.corp.sgi.com 2011 N.Shoreline Drive voice: 415-962-3642 Mt.View, CA 94039